1,600 Scientists Oppose Man-Caused Climate Change

Greetings Senators Crapo and Risch; Representatives Simpson and Fulcher; Governor Little; Lt. Governor Bedke and the Idaho State Legislature: CC: Lisa Grow, CEO and president of Idaho Power:

More and more scientists are opposing man-caused climate change due to Carbon Dioxide from fossil fuels. Now 1600 scientists have reinforced the 31,487 who previously opposed the Kyoto Climate Treaty which was opposed by the US Senate 95 to 0 because it would destroy our economy.

Climate change is being used to control all human activity on the earth, destroy our economy and redistribute our wealth to nations like India and China, the world’s largest polluters. Global warming is a gigantic HOAX! The fact is that we can NEVER obtain from wind and solar the necessary electricity to power our economy. To build wind and solar a tremendous amount of land is required that is sorely needed for crops and ranching.

The Carbon Dioxide released to produce, transport, install and maintain wind and solar is greater than the direct use of fossil fuels. The attack on coal, oil and natural gas must STOP! The US was energy independent & we exported oil with President Trump. Average gas price was $2.12 per gallon when he left office. The Biden Administration has a WAR on fossil fuels making us dependent on our enemies. Unbelievable! The Green New Deal with wind and solar is unsustainable as neither provide 24/7 electricity and both need a 24/7 backup which is natural gas now.

Remember, the very small amount of Carbon Dioxide at 410 PPM can NEVER kill the planet. It represents only 41 seats out of 100,000 seats in a football stadium which represents the atmosphere of the Earth.

Nuclear power reactors can provide safe, 24/7 electricity and take up very little land. They can be placed next to substations so more transmission lines would not be necessary. This should be the green energy to promote, so why is it never mentioned?

The politically controlled Nuclear Regulatory Commission is stonewalling our nuclear industry while China and Russia are greatly expanding their nuclear power industry.

Please read the following and let me know you will expose and STOP the climate change HOAX. Work to develop our nuclear power generation. It is the least expensive electricity source with the exception of hydro power. Thanks and please feel free to leave any comments in the Gem State Patriot comment section of this article.

Additional sources for Climate Change information.

The New American https://thenewamerican.com » Environment https://thenewamerican.com/us/environment »

James Murphy https://thenewamerican.com/contributor/james-murphy August 16, 2023

The declaration first made news last summer, https://thenewamerican.com/us/environment/1100-scientists-proclaim-there-is-no-climate-emergency but now several hundred signatures have been added, including that of Nobel Prize-winner John Clauser from the United States.

A network of more than 1,600 scientists and other professionals connected with the study of climate science have signed a document declaring that there is no climate emergency.

Scientists from all over the globe have signed the declaration https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/WCD-version-081423.pdf, which now includes two Nobel Prize winners: Clauser and Norwegian engineer and physicist Ivar Giaever. Other notable American signatories include MIT’s Dr. Richard Lindzen; Dr. H. Sterling Burnett of the Heartland Institute; and Dr. William Happer from Princeton.

The signatories believe that climate science has become far too politicized and that the discussion surrounding climate change has degraded into a war over beliefs rather than a true debate about science.

“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in,” the declaration explains. “This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”

The declaration shares several self-evident observations that cannot be reasonably refuted, among them the notion that the climate variability we see is largely the result of natural factors rather than a buildup of trace greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

“The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming,” the document states.

The declaration also pushes back on the fact that carbon dioxide, a gas necessary for life on Earth due to its role in photosynthesis, is categorized by the climate hysteric community as a “pollutant.”

“CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth,” the declaration states. “More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.” Commercial greenhouses “fertilize” with additional CO2 to greatly enhance plant growth.

Those invested in the climate-change fallacy have denigrated the declaration, claiming that it is “anti-science” and includes signatories who are without training in climate science or are beholden to fossil-fuel interests.

“It’s quite a lazy declaration. It doesn’t really have any supporting information. I would regard these views as fringe,” said Simon Cook https://www.thenational.scot/news/20676882.there-no-climate-emergency-clintel-declaration-debunked-experts, a lecturer on environmental science at Dundee University in Scotland. “They play on a veneer of credibility.”

OK. But that “veneer of credibility” now includes two Nobel laureates.

“This declaration willfully overlooks, over-simplifies and misrepresents basic facts, as well as the vast breadth of scientific knowledge on the interaction between atmospheric composition, climate and living organisms,” said Alistair Jump of Stirling University.

Jump accused the signatories of having their “head in the sand” when it comes to climate.

“People sticking their head in the sand won’t make the global climate emergency go away — it will just remove the chance that we have to mitigate the impacts of the climate crisis and prepare economically and socially for the profound change that it is already bringing to individuals, communities and ecosystems across the globe,” he said.

Scientists such as Jump and Cook have completely bought in to the climate emergency narrative and have no time for debate on the subject, which is another point that the declaration makes. Science without committed skepticism isn’t really science at all — it’s a belief system. It’s a belief system that its adherents would rather not be questioned. But without such questioning, that belief system is not science; it’s religion.

One of the signatories, Dr. H. Sterling Burnett, signed the declaration because he thought he had a duty to do so. “I signed on because it’s my belief that in situations where one understands a topic of public importance, it is wrong to stay silent when lies are being told,” Burnett told/The New American. Unfortunately, Burnett doubts that the declaration will help much with the current crop of climate decision-makers.

“Sadly I have no confidence that this or other declarations like it have significant influence over climate decision makers — of whom most are profiting in terms of money or power from the so-called climate crisis,” he added. “Such declarations can, however, influence public opinion, which hopefully will apply pressures to decision-makers (indirect influence), and buy time, provide a holding action so to speak, for the truth about climate change to become more widely known.”

Or, as the declaration itself says: “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”

TODAY’S CLIMATE SCIENCE IS ALL ABOUT POLITICS AND SOCIETAL CHANGE WHETHER SOCIETY WANTS THAT CHANGE OR NOT.